The Stock Market

[badge]

Badge

I don't actually use the DOW - but rather SPX. Looking at the chart - I can see - of course - that tonights low will be higher than the previous intraday low reached in early May. Therefore technically I should have said that was the low. However, those where "Intraday lows" - which often can give a "distorted view". Many "technical analysts will give you an "exact price" - by "drawing lines". My "theory" has very little to do with "technical analysis" and nothing to do with support - resistance - etc. (but I do not ignore them).

Therefore - to answer your question "to the best of my ability": We should decline to Dow 10340-10370 and SPX 1103-1108 tonight (which is roughly yesterdays lows) - before rebounding.

Fair enough. So y'days lows +/- should be a bottom of some degree if I understand you correctly.

Midas - Nothing more than perhaps the perception that the worst is behind us is neccessary for a move higher in stocks? If stocks move up from here, all we'll ever really know for sure is there were more buyers than sellers, and vice versa

[Parvis]

That's right - all we need is that perception changes - for the Market to go higher. I remember this comment "The Emperor has no clothes" - but at approx the same time I read in businessweek that there were US$73 trillion - if I recall correctly - on the sideline.

That's a lot of "small" change.

[Parvis]

Now - with the help of the futures - I can see now - yesterdays lows are most likely going to be undercut by a small amount (about 20-30 on Dow). But still should be the bottom of "this cycle".

Edited May 20, 2010 by Parvis

[midas]

Badge

I don't actually use the DOW - but rather SPX. Looking at the chart - I can see - of course - that tonights low will be higher than the previous intraday low reached in early May. Therefore technically I should have said that was the low. However, those where "Intraday lows" - which often can give a "distorted view". Many "technical analysts will give you an "exact price" - by "drawing lines". My "theory" has very little to do with "technical analysis" and nothing to do with support - resistance - etc. (but I do not ignore them).

Therefore - to answer your question "to the best of my ability": We should decline to Dow 10340-10370 and SPX 1103-1108 tonight (which is roughly yesterdays lows) - before rebounding.

Fair enough. So y'days lows +/- should be a bottom of some degree if I understand you correctly.

Midas - Nothing more than perhaps the perception that the worst is behind us is neccessary for a move higher in stocks? If stocks move up from here, all we'll ever really know for sure is there were more buyers than sellers, and vice versa

no i understand that perfectly

But that is my point ! I have been reading so many resources and i have not seen any comments from anyone other than Parvis ( and perhaps the OP of this thread ) who still has anything like a bullish perception ?

So this will be interesting :-

You have Parvis saying he sees no danger of much of a fall from 10,000 + versus

Raoul Pal who previously managed the GLG Global Macro Fund in London for GLG Partners ( one of the largest hedge fund groups in the world.)

predicting a crash within 2 weeks and you have Richard Russell, editor of the Dow Theory Letters ( posted by lannarebirth ) even saying investors should sell US stocks because the market is at risk of a "major crash". Meredith Whitney etc etc....all say them same.

So I think it is safe to say " perception " is sadly lacking

Edited May 20, 2010 by midas

[Parvis]

Famous last words:

'IT IS SAVE TO ASSUME THAT WE CANNOT ALL BE RIGHT NOR ALL BE WRONG'

Edited May 20, 2010 by Parvis

[lannarebirth]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/blue-line...11-percent,333/

[midas]

Famous last words:

'IT IS SAVE TO ASSUME THAT WE CANNOT ALL BE RIGHT'

even more famous last words

" DO NOT CHOOSE TO BE ON THE WRONG SIDE FOR THE SAKE OF BEING DIFFERENT " ha ha

Samuel Lord (1778-1844) one of the most famous buccaneers on the island of Barbados.

Edited May 20, 2010 by midas

[midas]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/blue-line...11-percent,333/

hillarious ha ha

[Parvis]

Famous last words:

'IT IS SAVE TO ASSUME THAT WE CANNOT ALL BE RIGHT'

even more famous last words

" DO NOT CHOOSE TO BE ON THE WRONG SIDE FOR THE SAKE OF BEING DIFFERENT " ha ha

Samuel Lord (1778-1844) one of the most famous buccaneers on the island of Barbados.

There are some who can never claim to be wrong simply because they never think on their own. But yes I did get out of my short position - but have not yet entered a long position and probably won't 'till tomorrow.

Edited May 20, 2010 by Parvis

[flying]

coincidence that the DOW is now right at the Flash Crash low spot ...

[midas]

Famous last words:

'IT IS SAVE TO ASSUME THAT WE CANNOT ALL BE RIGHT'

even more famous last words

" DO NOT CHOOSE TO BE ON THE WRONG SIDE FOR THE SAKE OF BEING DIFFERENT " ha ha

Samuel Lord (1778-1844) one of the most famous buccaneers on the island of Barbados.

There are some who can never claim to be wrong simply because they never think on their own. But yes I did get out of my short position - but have not yet entered a long position and probably won't 'till tomorrow.

Well i am certainly not claming to be right or wrong..........I am simply searching for what

seems most logical. Anyone can " think on their own " as much as they like but surely

the market is a herd mentality and investors will go with the flow.

I may be wrong but at the moment the flow doent seem very bullish to me ?

BUT you are the expert Mr Parvis but I cant help feeling where we all went horribly wrong is by

putting too much emphasis on squigly lines instead of which companies are actually making a buck at the end of the day i.e. without being

up to their neck in debt.

Good luck with your long position today

[midas]

coincidence that the DOW is now right at the Flash Crash low spot ...

I dont think we are there yet flying

ROUBINI: 20% Market Selloff Coming

http://www.businessinsider.com/roubini-20-...f-coming-2010-5

[flying]

coincidence that the DOW is now right at the Flash Crash low spot ...

I dont think we are there yet flying

ROUBINI: 20% Market Selloff Coming

http://www.businessinsider.com/roubini-20-...f-coming-2010-5

For sure no where near bottom

But I meant that flash crash a week or so ago.

Took the market to 10065 in short order remember?

The one they tried to say was a fat finger

[midas]

coincidence that the DOW is now right at the Flash Crash low spot ...

I dont think we are there yet flying

ROUBINI: 20% Market Selloff Coming

http://www.businessinsider.com/roubini-20-...f-coming-2010-5

For sure no where near bottom

But I meant that flash crash a week or so ago.

Took the market to 10065 in short order remember?

The one they tried to say was a fat finger

the only circumstances i can imagine would result in a bull market again

is another bloody bailout But would they dare ?!

[Parvis]

BUT you are the expert Mr Parvis but I cant help feeling where we all went horribly wrong is by

putting too much emphasis on squigly lines instead of which companies are actually making a buck at the end of the day i.e. without being

up to their neck in debt.

Good luck with your long position today

Well Midas

I was impatient and did get in on the upside at the very end of the day and slept like a baby thereafter. My "squigly lines" told me - enough is enough. The problem with my "squigly lines" is I cannot reliably project the "level" to be reached. I would have to rely on traditional technical analysis for that - which I don't. Therefore the drop was larger than I anticipated the day before (more profitable than I anticipated the day before).

Edited May 21, 2010 by Parvis

[badge]

[...]

Therefore - to answer your question "to the best of my ability": We should decline to Dow 10340-10370 and SPX 1103-1108 tonight (which is roughly yesterdays lows) - before rebounding.

So not only were 5/19/10 lows exceeded, but DOW cash declined to 10020 before futs took it to 10005 equiv., and SPX cash declined to 1071 before futs took it to 1063 equiv.

Perhaps the "oscillation" -system- needs more eyes of newt and wings of bat?

Hope you, or anyone, didnt get too roughed up.

[midas]

[...]

Therefore - to answer your question "to the best of my ability": We should decline to Dow 10340-10370 and SPX 1103-1108 tonight (which is roughly yesterdays lows) - before rebounding.

So not only were 5/19/10 lows exceeded, but DOW cash declined to 10020 before futs took it to 10005 equiv., and SPX cash declined to 1071 before futs took it to 1063 equiv.

Perhaps the "oscillation" -system- needs more eyes of newt and wings of bat?

Hope you, or anyone, didnt get too roughed up.

i have got an old dart board which i might try out

Meanwhile anyone want a free hat ?

[Parvis]

[...]

Therefore - to answer your question "to the best of my ability": We should decline to Dow 10340-10370 and SPX 1103-1108 tonight (which is roughly yesterdays lows) - before rebounding.

So not only were 5/19/10 lows exceeded, but DOW cash declined to 10020 before futs took it to 10005 equiv., and SPX cash declined to 1071 before futs took it to 1063 equiv.

Perhaps the "oscillation" -system- needs more eyes of newt and wings of bat?

Hope you, or anyone, didnt get too roughed up.

i have got an old dart board which i might try out

Meanwhile anyone want a free hat ?

As I have said before - I do not use traditional technical analysis - I therefore should refrain from giving any specific level. All you amateurs forever do is misquote intentionally because of your limited perspective. Perhaps you remember I only gave a "level" reluctantly - at "badge" request - to be "polite and considerate" in answering specific questions.

I realize my "projection of a specific level" which I gave rather "haphazardly" at "Badge" urging was undercut by some 200 points (profitably). But my original post on 5-19-2010 was:

5-20-2010 Bottom of Market per "Parvis Equilibrium for Strategic Non-Cooperative Derivative Trading".

You may notice I did not - and had not planned - to give you a specific Level - because that is just beyond my specific Theory.

Edited May 21, 2010 by Parvis

[midas]

[...]

Therefore - to answer your question "to the best of my ability": We should decline to Dow 10340-10370 and SPX 1103-1108 tonight (which is roughly yesterdays lows) - before rebounding.

So not only were 5/19/10 lows exceeded, but DOW cash declined to 10020 before futs took it to 10005 equiv., and SPX cash declined to 1071 before futs took it to 1063 equiv.

Perhaps the "oscillation" -system- needs more eyes of newt and wings of bat?

Hope you, or anyone, didnt get too roughed up.

i have got an old dart board which i might try out

Meanwhile anyone want a free hat ?

As I have said before - I do not use traditional technical analysis - I therefore should refrain from giving any specific level. All you amateurs forever do is misquote intentionally because of your limited perspective. Perhaps you remember I only gave a "level" reluctantly - at "badge" request - to be "polite and considerate" in answering specific questions.

I realize my "projection of a specific level" which I gave rather "haphazardly" at "Badge" urging was undercut by some 200 points (profitably). But my original post on 5-19-2010 was:

5-20-2010 Bottom of Market per "Parvis Equilibrium for Strategic Non-Cooperative Derivative Trading".

5-20-2010 a temporary dead cat bounce of 60-120 points up as per "Midas Dartboard Method of Trading " ( for amateurs only )

and then a resumption of the downward trend in a BEAR market

[Parvis]

Perhaps you still remember all the talk about "Plunge Protection Team" and the "You don't know what you are talking about" - and the complete silence about this issue when I posted a $100 000 reward for anyone able to give specific trading dates and names to prove the existence of PPT.

Many or even most of you are all talk - knowing little - never trying to expand their knowledge beyond their petty little minds - and never having - nor will have $100 000 to their name.

Edited May 21, 2010 by Parvis

[midas]

Perhaps you still remember all the talk about "Plunge Protection Team" and the "You don't know what you are talking about" - and the complete silence about this issue when I posted a $100 000 reward for anyone able to give specific trading dates and names to prove the existence of PPT.

Many or even most of you are all talk - knowing little - never trying to expand their knowledge beyond their petty little minds - and never having - nor will have $100 000 to their name.

That is like Manuel on Fawlty Towers " I know nothing "

You have to laugh because you cant take any of this stuff seriously any more

[badge]

To avoid any misquoting:

Watch out for the turn around - potentially tonight. I don't want to have to tell you "Told Ya".

[...]

Call #1 - The first mildly bullish call warnign of an impending "trun around". Market saw the biggest 1 day crash in 20years.

[...]

Therefore - to answer your question "to the best of my ability": We should decline to Dow 10340-10370 and SPX 1103-1108 tonight (which is roughly yesterdays lows) - before rebounding.

Call #2 - The scond mildyly bullish call, suggesting a double bottom "before rebounding". Market declined c.4% at extremes.

[...] All you amateurs forever do is misquote intentionally because of your limited perspective. Perhaps you remember I only gave a "level" reluctantly - at "badge" request - to be "polite and considerate" in answering specific questions.

[...]

Many or even most of you are all talk - knowing little - never trying to expand their knowledge beyond their petty little minds - and never having - nor will have $100 000 to their name.

I happen to have worked as a derivative broker in London, before working as a trader at a Long/Short strat Hedge fund. I now trade my own account.

Im just enjoying giving a condescending person enough rope to hang himself.

Perhaps you need to re-read Alchemy of Finance. We agree on one thing though; perhaps you should keep your 'calls' to yourself? Im sure they're always less dreadful that way, plus theres no need for all the conditions and caveats

That said, I have no schadenfreude, I hope no one has been too roughed up of late?

[midas]

You forgot to mention: - All successfull Economists are typically also successfull Mathematicians. Some of those successfull Mathematicians have received the Nobel Prize in Economics.

Uh-oh

LTCM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

it would be better sometimes if they were historians too

beware the self-appointed Masters of The Universe, Parvis my friend, and you'll spare yourself a lot of future misery!

In the time between now and you're next trade please read "When Genius Failed" and maybe watch "The Bonfire of The Vanities"

Gambles

You dont seem to have any time for LTCM ?

Is LTCM the same as what Horizons AlphaPro Gartman ETF is ? :-

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2...artman-etf.html

Edited May 21, 2010 by midas

[Parvis]

Badge

You can be assured that your "Schadenfreude" at present is inappropriate - in my case. To be on the "long side" as of the close of 5-20 suggests of course that I feel the Market will go up. Therefore your "Schadenfreude" would only be appropriate IF I were wrong - but that jury is of course still out. As an "Ex-Derivative Trader" - I am sure you are aware to make 40% and more on your capital at risk is not that difficult in a day or so - as long as you know exactly when to get in and out - and you will not know it a day ahead of time. Essentially it is not a question of timing the day correctly - but the hour correctly.

My theory - on which I base my trades - is certainly a new concept - to my knowledge - and in some way unproven. But what amazes me is how little is known of "timing" as a "scientific endeavour". Sooner or later someone my actually "publish" what I have found - it MAY even be me - and certain aspects of derivative trading would have to change forever - because we cannot all be making "easy money". But then - there is the question - why would one do it? For fame?

In every case, I "asked" for the negative replies. I am certainly aware of never telling specifics as a serious trader (which I am not - my agenda goes beyond trading) - I did it because I wanted to. You might say - it was an experiment from which I can walk away at any time. But maybe I am just a Masochist.

I actually had prefered that this Thread had consisted of more professionals who could have given me "properly directed" criticism and counter arguments - as I get when I post in a scientific journal. Since you said that you were a derivative trader - you probably should know specifically what I am refering to in "Parvis Equilibrium etc. etc. etc." - but since you have never seemed to understand - I must assume your experience does not go beyond "scalping".

Edited May 21, 2010 by Parvis

[lannarebirth]

Now - with the help of the futures - I can see now - yesterdays lows are most likely going to be undercut by a small amount (about 20-30 on Dow). But still should be the bottom of "this cycle".

Well, you have to define the cycle don't you? Is it the 4 day cycle? The 21 day cycle? 34 day cycle? 55 day cycle? 22 week cycle? 74 week cycle? 80 week cycle? Kress Cycle? Kitchin Cycle? What are we talking about here?

[Parvis]

Now - with the help of the futures - I can see now - yesterdays lows are most likely going to be undercut by a small amount (about 20-30 on Dow). But still should be the bottom of "this cycle".

Well, you have to define the cycle don't you? Is it the 4 day cycle? The 21 day cycle? 34 day cycle? 55 day cycle? 22 week cycle? 74 week cycle? 80 week cycle? Kress Cycle? Kitchin Cycle? What are we talking about here?

No it is not a "regular cycle" - but a cycle as defined by "Market forces" - which I sometimes "anticipate" to reverse - but cannot be 100% certain - to reverse - until the day it happens. "Anticipation" is not an exact science. Therefore in future I will call it the "Parvis cycle".

Edited May 21, 2010 by Parvis

[Naam]

Now - with the help of the futures - I can see now - yesterdays lows are most likely going to be undercut by a small amount (about 20-30 on Dow). But still should be the bottom of "this cycle".

Well, you have to define the cycle don't you? Is it the 4 day cycle? The 21 day cycle? 34 day cycle? 55 day cycle? 22 week cycle? 74 week cycle? 80 week cycle? Kress Cycle? Kitchin Cycle? What are we talking about here?

[Parvis]

Now - with the help of the futures - I can see now - yesterdays lows are most likely going to be undercut by a small amount (about 20-30 on Dow). But still should be the bottom of "this cycle".

Well, you have to define the cycle don't you? Is it the 4 day cycle? The 21 day cycle? 34 day cycle? 55 day cycle? 22 week cycle? 74 week cycle? 80 week cycle? Kress Cycle? Kitchin Cycle? What are we talking about here?

Herr Naam - I love your cycle. Can I convince you to part from it? It appears to be exactly the type of cycle I am talking about. It goes round and round and where it stops only a "mathematically inclined" mind can determine.

Edited May 21, 2010 by Parvis

[lannarebirth]

Now - with the help of the futures - I can see now - yesterdays lows are most likely going to be undercut by a small amount (about 20-30 on Dow). But still should be the bottom of "this cycle".

Well, you have to define the cycle don't you? Is it the 4 day cycle? The 21 day cycle? 34 day cycle? 55 day cycle? 22 week cycle? 74 week cycle? 80 week cycle? Kress Cycle? Kitchin Cycle? What are we talking about here?

Herr Naam - I love your cycle. Can I convince you to part from it? It appears to be exactly the type of cycle I am talking about. It goes round and round and where it stops only a "mathematically inclined" mind can determine.

Being mathematically inclined IS helpful, especially if you can move out to Fibonacci and Lucasian type numbers. What helps even more in my experience is the ability to "think as a criminal does".

Edited May 21, 2010 by lannarebirth

[Parvis]

Being mathematically inclined IS helpful, especially if you can move out to Fibonacci and Lucasian type numbers. What helps even more in my experience is the ability to "think as a criminal does".

Ahh - sounds familiar - maybe you are on track to greatness but I would like to emphasize - ability to "think as a criminal does" - should no include to practice what your ability perceives.